Titanfall: Xbox One vs. Xbox 360 - Graphics Comparison
Titanfall on 360 was promised to be a first class experience. See how it stacks up to the Xbox One version.
At the beginning of Last Gen, the exact same complaints were being raised. Does anyone remember Perfect Dark Zero? It wasn't "next gen" enough. Give it a year. PS4 and XB1 will have their Modern Warfare moment. I imagine DICE's Star Wars effort will turn some heads.
They should had called this Titanfall: Xbox One vs. Xbox 360 - Graphics Comparison - warning incoming Sony fanboys comment alert.
that comparison is just proved that the xbox one is a console from the last gen with just more superior color
Next time you do this don't tell people which one is which. You play on our ignorance by telling us this is the (X) version and this is the (Y) version. Seriously we should just know right away or stop making graphic comments on message boards.
Is it just me, or we've basically reached the point where a "new generation" improvement is just not all that impressive.
They need to compare the Xbox one version with the PC version not the Xbox 360.What I will do with this kind of comparison,of course this comparison will show that the Xbox one is better but when you compare it to the PC then you will see the real difference.
I don't think it's that it looks really good on X1, it seems to just look average on X1 and fucking horrible on 360..
I suppose people don't understand the visual difference between 400 and 4000 polygons and 4000 vs 40000 polygons. If this person is you, please look it up. I didn't expect the titanfall on the 360 to be crappy, just like pc games have been better looking overall, but a similar experience to the 360 for years. If one expects better benefits to games, one may have to wait until next gen game engines are used. I like the source engine and couldn't believe Halflife 2 using directX9c many years ago, but it's now dated and doesn't exactly benefit new hardware like Unreal 4 perhaps could...
Considering how old the tech in the 360 is, it kept up with the graphics of the Xbox One version pretty well.
That said, the Xbox One version isn't particularly breathtaking
I think this was a marketing ploy; I think the 360 could show the same graphics if they wanted it to! Nice try!! the graphics on the Xone should 10x better and it is just not there yet. In this day and age in-game play should look like the pre-rendered cut screens.
Design a game for current and previous generation and the games always feel like they are held back.
Think about what they could have done if in the back of their minds they didn't have to always say "Can we make this work on 9-10 year old technology" Nope? - Scrap that idea.
It looks better on the X1, I think the phrase: "Next-Gen" is over hyped and people expected a quantum leap from previous gen. give it a lil time, and slowly Youll see better graphics. But make no mistake it looks better on the X1. Of course if youre a PC gamer like me, lol this aint nothing new.
so the big leap from the previous generation was to add contrast...? personally the fact that a 9 year old xbox 360 ( from a time when we were using windows xp) could hold up to an xbox one is a dam shame
Not much of a difference. I'll admit, in some instances, like when you disable a bomb, the Xbox One is looks better, but the difference overall is not that great.
Some textures and shadows are better on X1 along with resolution and frame rates. Same as PS3 / PS4 comparison for MGS and Assassin's Creed for instance. Nothing to dance about here ponies, move along!
Just demonstrates how disappointing the new generation of consoles are. Sony and Microsoft learned from Nintendo's Wii that dishing out cheap hardware can make you billions.
Odd. Comparing these two versions is just like comparing the xbox one and ps4 versions of Ground Zeroes.
@slduncanlaw I remember Perfect Dark Zero.......One reason why I'm afraid of buying Killer Instinct(I'm afraid they hyped the game too much, then it'll turn out to be a failure)
@MaP_Hagmen and there is one above :D
@MaP_Hagmen Sounds like you miss them
@GOGOHeadray They seem like a "Composite Vs HDMI" comparison, but the first year games are released for the XB1 and PS4 won't show of the full power(as with any console before).
@goldmask My thoughts exactly. Moreover, it's from the same guys that made Call of Duty: MW. Modern Warfare was awesome for the time it was launched. But, now, meh. Even the font-face is the same as Call of Duty!
@Ailurusf It's not about polygons anymore. It's about resolution, lighting, texture resolution, anti-aliasing, shading, draw distance, physics, particle effects, etc.
To me PS3/360 vs Xbone/PS4/PC is like night and day. I found Infamous Second Son to be a pretty impressive looking game.
@saygoodie You have to remember that the Xbox 360 didn't have games that were stunning looking until pretty late in the lifecycle. I'd imagine it'll pretty similar with the Xbox One. Besides, the hardware upgrade isn't just about graphics- the new console have multiple times the amount of RAM the old consoles had, which means better open worlds, and the processor isn't that bad either.
@boringdork Imagine how PC players are feeling. Being held back by nearly 10 year old consoles.
@flashn00b Nothing to do with the engine, Splinter Cell Blacklist uses Unreal Engine 2.5.
@taker254isback the difference is in the ram and the amount of things they can put in the game. But at the end a game can only be as big as the team that works on it and 70 people for titanfall is not much so they did a lot with what they had.
@sdcazares1980 I guess you haven't played the game. There was no bomb disabling. =) There was, however, turret capturing.
@bigimpact21 wrong. NBA 2k14, Ryse, MGS V, Killzone
@FBohler we can dance if we want to, we can dance, we can dance
@ScottOakley Like 1080p is something astonishing. Cute.
@Heirren LOL so true
"You have to remember that the Xbox 360 didn't have games that were stunning looking until pretty late in the lifecycle. I'd imagine it'll pretty similar with the Xbox One. Besides, the hardware upgrade isn't just about graphics- the new console have multiple times the amount of RAM the old consoles had, which means better open worlds, and the processor isn't that bad either."
Not really. In the first year, MAY BE you are right, but in nov 2006 gears of war was released.
Gear of war is one of those games that really shock you the first time you see it running. It was unlike anything we had ever seen on the original xbox / ps2 or even the PC.
Only three other games caused that kind of impact in me in my whole life (Doom 1, Quake 1, Unreal Tournament 1). It was a major milestone graphics wise. Looks pretty impressive even today.
@Colekern @saygoodieThe reason why this was true with the 360 and Ps3 is because the developers were working with architexture they were not familiar with. This time around they are working with an x86 arch that you also see in your PCs. So no its not going to be like that, within a year or two the consoles will be max'd out in terms of perfromance, rather pathetic really.
@Kooken58 @boringdorkBeing a PC player myself I can tell you that you're talking about a small percentage. Not all PC players have such high end PCs. Actually the consoles play into the hands of those like me (with moderate spec). Without consoles games would have such high requirements by now almost all of them would be unplayable to someone like me. I can properly play all games until 2011 and even some recent games if I dial down the graphics. Without consoles this would be impossible. The people who are being held back (the ones with extremely good PCs) are few.